Both inlays were easily implanted, Raindrop did not require additional centration instrument. The Raindrop group showed faster visual recovery for near and distance, reaching stability by 1 month. At 6 month, mean monocular UNVA was better in the Raindrop group ( Raindrop 0.80 vs. Kamra 0.71 ). Both groups achieved mean binocular UDVA of 1.0. Mesopic activities ( i.e.driving, reading ) were easier in the Raindrop group. Two inlays were explanted in the Kamra group and none in the Raindrop group.

Conclusions:

Raindrop showed better near vision,easier mesopic functionality and faster visual recovery time when compared to Kamra. Both groups performed well binocularly at distance. In my experience , Kamra and Raindrop inlays appear to be viable options in the treatment of presbyopia.

Financial Interest:

One of the authors travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a competing company